Trump in Poland: “Our Civilization Will Triumph”

A far cry from Obama’s avowal that Islamic civilization will triumph.

Interrupted repeatedly by chants of “Donald Trump! Donald Trump! Donald Trump!” as he was speaking in Poland
on Thursday, President Trump delivered a ringing affirmation that he would defend Western civilization: “Just as Poland could not be broken, I declare today for the world to hear that the West will never, ever be broken. Our values will prevail, our people will thrive, and our civilization will triumph.”

Now, we’re used to Presidents affirming that civilization will triumph. Barack Obama did it, too. Trump’s remarkable innovation here, and sharp departure from the example his predecessor set, is in declaring that Western
civilization would triumph. Barack Hussein Obama, by contrast, was famous for declaring the triumph of Islamic
civilization, most notably when he told the United Nations General Assembly
on September 25, 2012: “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.”

If the future is not to belong to those who are perceived as slandering the prophet of Islam, Sharia blasphemy laws criminalizing criticism of Islam will have to have been imposed; people aren’t likely to give up criticizing Muhammad voluntarily, especially as jihad terror attacks incited by his teachings become an ever more common feature of life in the West. Thus if the future doesn’t belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam, it will be because the freedom of speech has been extinguished and Islamic values have prevailed: Islamic civilization will have triumphed.

If that was not what Barack Obama wanted, he never gave any indication of it during eight years in the White House. The Democrats constantly pointed to his killings of bin Laden and al-Awlaki as indication that he was tough on terrorism, but amid foreign and domestic policies indefatigably supporting the Muslim Brotherhood and its auxiliaries in the United States, unstinting opposition to the freedom of speech regarding criticism of Islam, and an appalling deal that gave aid and comfort to the Islamic Republic of Iran, those killings only made clear that while Obama evidently opposed violent jihad, he had no serious objection to other methods of Sharia imposition and Islamization.

In Warsaw Thursday, Trump offered a radically different vision. “We are fighting hard against radical Islamic terrorism,” he declared. “And we will prevail. We cannot accept those who reject our values and who use hatred to justify violence against the innocent.”

“We cannot accept those who reject our values.” After eight years of Obama acting as if the freedom of speech and the right to bear arms were burdens to be cast off rather than rights to be defended, this is an extraordinary statement. It is also one of the reasons why Trump’s notorious “travel ban” contains a little-noted directive that is clearly designed to preserve American values. The
March 6 executive order
states:

.

To be more transparent with the American people and to implement more effectively policies and practices that serve the national interest, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Attorney General, shall, consistent with applicable law and national security, collect and make publicly available the following information:…information regarding the number and types of acts of gender-based violence against women, including so-called "honor killings," in the United States by foreign nationals.

Muslims commit 91 percent of honor killings worldwide. A manual of Islamic law certified as a reliable guide to Sunni orthodoxy by Al-Azhar, the most respected authority in Sunni Islam, says that “retaliation is obligatory against anyone who kills a human being purely intentionally and without right.” However, “not subject to retaliation” is “a father or mother (or their fathers or mothers) for killing their offspring, or offspring’s offspring.” (Reliance of the Traveller
o1.1-2). In other words, someone who kills his child incurs no legal penalty under Islamic law. In this case the victim was the murderer’s daughter, a victim to the culture of violence and intimidation that such laws help create.

The Palestinian Authority gives pardons or suspended sentences
for honor murders. Iraqi women have asked for tougher sentences
for Islamic honor murderers, who get off lightly now. Syria in 2009 scrapped a law
limiting the length of sentences for honor killings, but “the new law says a man can still benefit from extenuating circumstances in crimes of passion or honour ‘provided he serves a prison term of no less than two years in the case of killing.’” And in 2003 the Jordanian Parliament voted down on Islamic grounds a provision designed to stiffen penalties for honor killings. Al-Jazeera reported
that “Islamists and conservatives said the laws violated religious traditions and would destroy families and values.”

Until the encouragement Islamic law gives to honor killing is acknowledged and confronted, more women will suffer. President Trump is trying to keep women from suffering in this way in the United States.

That element of the executive order is the kind of thing that is involved in ensuring that “our civilization will triumph”: stopping the encroachment of Sharia values in the United States. Trump in Warsaw wasn’t just paying lip service to unattainable ideals, any more than Obama was when he said that “the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.” Obama worked very hard to make sure that would be true, and now his successor is working very hard to ensure that Judeo-Christian civilization survives instead. Americans can be grateful that we do not, for the moment, have (as Trump as said) a President of the world, but a President of the United States.

And, Obama also blamed ... in a less open way ... the Judaeo-Christian values of the West.

President Trump and I share something, besides fundamental beliefs. People call him, "Un-Presidential". My students call me "Un-Professorial", because when they ask me a question, I don't spend five minutes of class time carefully crafting every sentence ... and chosing the words in a sentence ... in response. I tend to give rapid-fire responses, because I know my material.

Mr. Trump speaks from the heart, and he knows what he wants to say. His delivery is very good ... although he's still having a hard time getting used to the teleprompter. His sincerity pours out of every word. He's a believer in what he says. By contrast, Mr. Obama had to hide his true meaning behind painstakingly-crafted words and phrases.

Good point about the teleprompter. He probably never or rarely had to use it previously. Speaking spontaneously he is very good, but there is always a chance of a minor slip up when speaking spontaneously. Speaking from a teleprompter is good for staying on script, but boring as heck, and just a way of avoiding really responding to a question and slipping into a trap.

2 “Son of man, set your face against Mount Seir, and prophesy against it

3 and say to it, ‘Thus says the Lord [a]God,

“Behold, I am against you, Mount Seir,And I will stretch out My hand against youAnd make you a desolation and a waste.4 “I will lay waste your citiesAnd you will become a desolation.Then you will know that I am the Lord.

5 Because you have had everlasting enmity and have [b]delivered the sons of Israel to the power of the sword at the time of their calamity, at the time of the [c]punishment of the end,

6 therefore as I live,” declares the Lord God, “I will [d]give you over to bloodshed, and bloodshed will pursue you; since you have not hated bloodshed, therefore bloodshed will pursue you.

7 I will make Mount Seir a waste and a desolation and I will cut off from it the one who passes through and returns.

8 I will fill its mountains with its slain; on your hills and in your valleys and in all your ravines those slain by the sword will [e]fall.

9 I will make you an everlasting desolation and your cities will not be inhabited. Then you will know that I am the Lord.

10 “Because you have said, ‘These two nations and these two lands will be mine, and we will possess [f]them,’ although the Lord was there,

11 therefore as I live,” declares the Lord God, “I will deal with you according to your anger and according to your envy which you showed because of your hatred against them; so I will make Myself known among them when I judge you.

12 Then you will know [g]that I, the Lord, have heard all your revilings which you have spoken against the mountains of Israel saying, ‘They are laid desolate; they are given to us for food.’

13 And you have [h]spoken arrogantly against Me and have multiplied your words against Me; I have heard it.”

14 Thus says the Lord God, “As all the earth rejoices, I will make you a desolation.

15 As you rejoiced over the inheritance of the house of Israel because it was desolate, so I will do to you. You will be a desolation, O Mount Seir, and all Edom, all of it. Then they will know that I am the Lord.”’

"Our values will prevail, our people will thrive and our civilisation will triumph". In Europe we need to listen to a visiting American President, because at home our heads of state and PMs are already incapable to speak up in such a clear way. Our civilisation is indeed based on Judeo-Christian values. The EU deliberately choose not to mention those roots while drafting its constitution because secularism became the new creed, although Islam too was ment to be part of the game. And the consequences of that choice can be seen everywhere. Churches are demolished, mosques are multiplying, Jews are fleeing away from the continent. Replacing Judeo-Christian values with multiculturalism, open borderism, relativism is a tragic error which is forbidden even to mention, due to the imposed culture of political correctness. Each Union has precisely the Donald which it deserves. You got Donald Trump, true defender of America and the West. We have to live under Donald Tusk, Islamiser of the EU.

Whatever you said about Mohammed, however profane, would be the truth and therefore no slander. Would that we still had an American press (or even an opposition party) to have asked Barry at the time, "How do you "slander" a psychopathic warlord and pedophile?"

A bit further, I would (have, actually) blasphemed the "prophet", the evil false "god" he supposedly "prophesies" for, the satanic demon who impersonated Gabriel, and the stinking camel they rode in on.

For the first time in 8 years we have a President that will stand-up for this Great Country, The Polish people know all to well the cost of being FREE. When Obie removed the missile defense system from their country, they were left "out in the cold". They will always remember that.

Robert Spencer: "[S]topping the encroachment of Sharia values in the United States..." will never occur without identifying and addressing the genesis of the Muslim invasion of America.

CLUE: There were no openly practicing Muslims, no Mosques, no Sharia, and no Islamic terrorism in 17th-century Colonial America whose governments of, by, and for God were established upon Yahweh's moral law, beginning with the First Commandment:

"...When the 18th-century founders replaced the First Commandment (found intact in some 17th-century Colonial Constitutions) with the First Amendment, America was transformed from a predominantly monotheistic Christian nation (a united nation under one God, Yahweh) into arguably the most polytheistic nation to exist (adivided nation under many gods, including Islam's Allah).

"It’s one thing to allow for individual freedom of conscience and private choice of gods, something impossible to legislate for or against. It’s another matter altogether for government to enable any and all religions to proliferate through the land and evangelize our posterity to false gods. This is what the First Amendment legitimizes. It is an unequivocal violation of the First Commandment and the polar opposite of the following First Commandment statute:

'[Y]e shall destroy their altars, break their images, and cut down their groves. For thou shall worship no other god: for Yahweh, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God: Lest thou … go a whoring after their gods….' (Exodus 34:13-15)...."

For more, see blog article "National Religious Freedom Day aka Celebrating the Founders' Violation of the First Commandment" at http://www.constitutionmyth....

Then see online Chapter 11 "Amendment 1: Government-Sanctioned Polytheism" of "Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective" at
http://www.bibleversusconst....

Agreed, but it would be far, far easier to get rid of the heavily infested areas, such as Krapofornia, The Left Coast and the northeast corner. We'll have less money, but who cares as we'll be free and have liberty.

What unscholarly rubbish. The first amendment prevented teh federal govt. from creating an "establishment of religion" i.e. a state church as was the Church of England. Those states which had a state church could continue such, e.g. Massachusetts disestablished the Congregational Church in 1830. None of this, however, altered the Christian culture of the nation. Utah, for example, was denied admission to the union so long as Mormons continued polygamy because, in the words on one Justice, "Polygamy is not a Christian practice, and this is a Christian nation." Mr. Weiland is as ignorant of constitutional history as he is of scripture.

There are TWO clauses in the first part of the First Amendment: the Establishment Clause AND the Free Exercise Clause. My post addresses the latter of two. And there is no question that it is the Free Exercise Clause that's the genesis of the open proliferation of not only Islam, but Judaism, Hinduism, etc. in America.

Furthermore, Article 6's religious test ban (eliminating the States' Christian tests, the only religious tests at the time, on the federal level) was directly influenced by Jews (Rabbi Jonas Phillips and Philadelphia’s Mikveh Israel Synagogue specifically), so that other anti-Christ Jews (see 2 John 1:7-11) could become full-fledged citizens, including serving as civil leaders. This, in turn, opened the door for Muslims (like Keith Ellison) to do the same.

For more and for documentation regarding what I stated above (in addition to Chapter 11 mentioned in my original post) see Chapter 9 "Article 6: The Supreme Law of the Land" of "Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The ChristianPerspective" at
http://www.bibleversusconst....

You obviously read into scripture your own private revelation, which is the first logical fault and then commit other logical fallacies. The immigration law change in 1965 has nothing to do with the 17th Century but with Democratic Party politics and the lobbying of the ADL, et. al. and equating segregation with the National Origins Act. Had that act not been abrogated the Moslem issues would not exist as immigration from the Middle East was severely restricted.

Religious tests existed to keep dissenters from holding office. In Britain it was to keep dissenters from the Church of England out, in the then colonies it was to keep dissenters from whatever was the prevailing orthodoxy out. When the constitution was written religious tests were eliminated to keep harmony within the new nation. Leonard Levy's Origins of the Bill of Rights examines this issue as does Max Farrand and other scholars on the 6th Amendment prohibition of religious tests. Jms. Madison was vehemently opposed to religious tests as well to a state religion. It had nothing to do with Jews who were already considered citizens of the new nation as they, and all Americans, were British subjects until Britain recognized the 13 colonies as free and independent states. In Britain the Test and Corporation Acts which had prevented Protestant dissenters from the CofE and Roman Catholics from holding office were abolished in 1832.

Jumping ahead Keith Ellison is illogical and nonsense. If there is an issue with Hindus, Moslems etc., it is not with the Constitution, but with immigration law changes beginning in 1965 which revoked the National Origins Act replacing with with law that now favored the 3d world. Seeing that they were losing the white vote, and that the black vote was not enough to keep them in power, the Democrats (with Republicans like Sen Javits) with Pres Johnson and the Kennedys in the lead, decided to import a 3d world electorate to "fundamentally change" the nation.

You best go back and brush up on some more period history. You obviously don't know it as well as you think you do. I recommend beginning with the State Ratifying Convention notes. You'll find therein (documented in Chapter 9, link above) that the most hotly debated component of the Constitution was Article 6's Christian test ban because they knew it opened the door to Jews, Muslims (known then as Mohametans), Hindoos, and other non-Christians holding positions of civil leadership.

You say the problem originated with the immigration laws, beginning in 1965. Well, what made those immigration laws even possible? The First Commandment or the First Amendment?

Those same immigration laws would have been impossible under the 17th-century Colonial laws based upon Yahweh's immutable/unchanging moral law, which begins with the First Commandment.

Instead, those laws are a contemporary fulfillment of Hosea's prophecy:

"[B]ecause they have transgressed my covenant, and trespassed against my law ... they have sown the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind...." (Hosea 8:1, 7)

Today's America is merely reaping the inevitable ever-intensifying whirlwind resulting from the wind sown by the constitutional framers.

Trump is in many ways an embarrassment to America ; a coup de D'etat by ''reality TV ''...a vulgar ignoramus and preening narcissist ; an egomaniac and thin skinned, petulant overgrown schoolboy ..a natural bully and chauvinist creep ...yes all of these things and more, but he also happens to be right on all of the big issues and so he can afford to be wrong on the lesser things ...we should pragmatically forgive him for his lesser transgressions and applaud him when he instinctively gets things right !

You obviously don't really know him, you should do some research on who he really is. You can judge a man by his family and his are very successful. Don't waste your time telling me he has been divorced, half of America has been.

Trump's Polish speech was one of the most important made by any US President since Kennedy. It delivered a message and an ultimatum to all of us in the west. Either we cherish our beliefs and cultures, or we can start learning the Koran right now. Democracy, freedom of speech and ideas, separation of powers, capitalism. Or ISIS.

Our choice, and the mainstream media hardly mentioned any of this, because it wants ISIS.

Let's start using a new term: "shame killings" instead of "honor killings". They are killings that are intended to cover up shame, while the killings themselves could legitimately be considered a source of shame.

Thank you R.S. I have been publishing articles about this and have two I'm working on at present. You are so well-researched and to the point every day. I am encouraged every day by your perseverance, fortitude, and wisdom.